Year of inscription on the World Heritage List 2004
Year(s) of inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger 2004-2013
Threats for which the property was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger
Destruction of the property caused by the earthquake in December 2003.
Corrective measures identified
To be determined based on the redefined Outstanding Universal Value (see below).
Timeframe for the implementation of the corrective measures:
By February 2009 (see below).
Previous Committee Decisions see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1208/documents/
Requests approved: 0
Total amount approved: USD 50,000
For details, see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1208/assistance/
UNESCO Extra-budgetary Funds
Total amount provided to the property: USD 872,500.
Previous monitoring missions
Several UNESCO missions undertaken in 2004 and 2005; Mission by UNESCO-Tehran Office in February and March 2006.
Factors affecting the property identified in previous reports
a) Lack of comprehensive management plan;
b) Discrepancy between the potential Outstanding Universal Value of the property and the boundaries of the property actually inscribed on the World Heritage List.
Illustrative material see page http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1208/
Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2006
A comprehensive management plan is being drafted within the framework of the financial assistance provided through the UNESCO Japan Funds-in-Trust Emergency Co-operation for Bam. According to a letter from the Iranian Cultural Heritage and Tourism Organization, dated 29 January 2006, this draft management plan takes into consideration possible redefined protective zones of the World Heritage property based on the new archaeological discoveries following the earthquake.
These new archaeological discoveries have raised questions concerning the extent to which the current World Heritage core and buffer zones should be enlarged. The Iranian authorities are currently examining this issue with experts. Based upon the conclusions of the experts, newly redefined core and buffer zones and the Outstanding Universal Value of the property may be proposed for the World Heritage Committee’s approval. Should the core and buffer zones be modified significantly, the Iranian authorities will accordingly need to re-nominate the property, following paragraph 165 of the Operational Guidelines.
Due to the complexity and particular conditions of the property, the updated version of the nomination file and the benchmarks for possible removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger have not yet been elaborated and it is premature to examine the benchmarks for removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger before the updated nomination file is finalised. Indeed ICOMOS believes that while the State Party is making laudable progress in moving towards the objectives set out by the Committee and the long-term management of the property, more time will be needed to complete the management plan and to ensure its full and effective implementation. Therefore, reasonable benchmarks for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger would be the completion and full implementation of the approved management plan.
The Iranian authorities are expected to submit the updated nomination file by February 2007. Should the file include elements that require redefinition of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and its physical attributes, the State Party should follow a standard 18-month nomination cycle, resulting in the site being inscribed on the World Heritage List with the newly defined Outstanding Universal Value during 2008. Therefore, the benchmarks for removal from the List of World Heritage in Danger could be considered for February 2009. On the contrary, if the updated nomination file justifies the current Outstanding Universal Value, the possible removal could be considered for February 2008.
Meanwhile, a significant cultural grant was provided by the Government of Japan amounting to USD 1 million for the procurement and delivery of technical equipment in March 2006 for the national conservation efforts of the property.
Analysis and Conclusions of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM
Decision Adopted: 30COM 7A.25
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined Document WHC-06/30.COM/7A,
2. Recalling Decision 29 COM 7A 23, adopted at its 29th session (Durban, 2005),
3. Commends the State Party and the UNESCO Japan Funds-in-Trust project for the progress made to elaborate a comprehensive management plan for the existing World Heritage property;
4. Urges the State Party to accelerate its efforts to clearly redefine the World Heritage protective zones which fully reflects the Outstanding Universal Value of Bam and its Cultural Landscape;
5. Requests the World Heritage Centre in cooperation with ICOMOS and the State Party, to define benchmarks for the possible removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger, and to encourage training programmes through the assistance of international donors;
6. Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2007, a progress report on the implementation of the recommendations mentioned in paragraphs 4 and 5, as well as on the state of conservation of the property for examination by the Committee at its 31st session in 2007; and
7. Decides to retain Bam and its Cultural Landscape (Islamic Republic of Iran) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Decision Adopted: 30COM 8C.2
The World Heritage Committee,
1. Having examined the state of conservation reports of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-06/30.COM/7A and WHC-06/30.COM/7A.Add.Rev),
2. Maintains the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:
• Afghanistan, Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Decision 30 COM 7A.22)
• Afghanistan, Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley, (Decision 30 COM 7A.23)
• Azerbaijan, Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower (Decision 30 COM 7A.29)
• Benin, Royal Palaces of Abomey (Decision 30 COM 7A.16)
• Central African Republic, Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.1)
• Chile, Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works (Decision 30 COM 7A.31)
• Côte d'Ivoire, Comoé National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.2)
• Côte d'Ivoire / Guinea, Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Decision 30 COM 7A.3)
• Democratic Rep. of the Congo, Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Decision 30 COM 7A.8)
• Democratic Rep. of the Congo Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.6)
• Democratic Rep. of the Congo Virunga National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.7)
• Democratic Rep. of the Congo Garamba National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.4)
• Democratic Rep. of the Congo Salonga National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.5)
• Egypt, Abu Mena (Decision 30 COM 7A.19)
• Ethiopia, Simien National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.9)
• Honduras, Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Decision 30 COM 7A.15)
• India, Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (Decision 30 COM 7A.13)
• Islamic Republic of Iran, Bam and its Cultural Landscape (Decision 30 COM 7A.25)
• Iraq, Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Decision 30 COM 7A.20)
• Jerusalem, Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (Decision 30 COM 7A.34)
• Nepal, Kathmandu Valley (Decision 30 COM 7A.26)
• Niger, Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Decision 30 COM 7A.10)
• Pakistan, Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore (Decision 30 COM 7A.27)
• Peru, Chan Chan Archaelogical Zone (Decision 30 COM 7A.32)
• Philippines, Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Decision 30 COM 7A.28)
• United Republic of Tanzania, Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo Mnara (Decision 28 COM 7A.17)
• United States of America, Everglades National Park (Decision 30 COM 7A.14)
• Venezuela, Coro and its Port (Decision 30 COM 7A.33)
• Yemen, Historic Town of Zabid (Decision 30 COM 7A.21)